Mondelez falsely markets cocoa products as sustainable, free from forced labor, class action claims

Mondelez class action lawsuit overview:

• Who: Plaintiff Tim Gollogly filed a class action lawsuit against Mondelez International Inc.
• Why: Gollogly claims that Mondelez falsely markets its Cocoa Life products as being ethically sourced.
• Where: The Mondelez cocoa class action lawsuit was filed in Illinois federal court.

A recent Mondelez class action lawsuit claims the company falsely markets its “Cocoa Life” cocoa sourcing practices as sustainable and free from forced labor.

“But contrary to Mondelez’s claims, the supply and production of the products contribute to grievous and unsustainable labor abuses, including the worst forms of child and forced labor … [and] other exploitative labor practices that are endemic in the cocoa industry,” the Mondelez cocoa class action lawsuit states.

“Cocoa Life” is a purported global sustainability program created by Mondelez. The Cocoa Life logo states “100% sustainably sourced cocoa,” leading consumers to believe the products are sustainably sourced, plaintiff Tim Gollogly alleges.

Consumers are increasingly concerned about the use of fair and sustainable labor practices and seek out products made without forced labor, child labor or other exploitative working conditions, Gollogly says in the Mondelez cocoa lawsuit..

The Mondelez class action notes cocoa farming has a “well-publicized history of utilizing the worst forms of child labor and/or forced labor.” Children as young as 10 years old are reportedly subjected to “arduous manual labor” to meet the demand on cocoa farms.

Gollogly says consumers who want to purchase ethically-sourced products from industries known to engage in problematic labor practices must rely on packaging, marketing, advertising and certifications to determine which products align with their values.

Mondelez Cocoa Life logo falsely touts sustainable practices, plaintiff says

Mondelez reportedly created the Cocoa Life program in 2012 to facilitate a more sustainable cocoa supply. The Cocoa Life logo allegedly misrepresents its products supporting a “vibrant” supply chain that “transform[s] the livelihoods of farmers and their communities,” when in reality Mondelez’s supply chain includes farms in Ghana where children perform hard labor and farmers are allegedly paid less than the equivalent of two euros per day.

Gollogly says the Cocoa Life logo is prominently placed on several popular Mondelez cocoa products, including Oreo and Toblerone. He says he purchased Oreo Cookies and Toblerone chocolate products bearing the Cocoa Life logo and believed the supply chain was ethically-sourced. 

Had he known the products were not ethically sourced, Gollogly says he would not have paid as much for them or would not have purchased them at all. He filed the Mondelez class action lawsuit on behalf of all consumers in the United States who purchased Mondelez cocoa products within the applicable statute of limitations period.

The Mondelez class action lawsuit asserts claims for Violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act, various state consumer protection statutes, breach of express warranty and unjust enrichment.

A recent Hershey class action lawsuit alleged the company falsely claimed its chocolate was sourced ethically and sustainably.

What do you think about the allegations Mondelez cocoa is not ethically sourced? Join the discussion in the comments.

Gollogly is represented by P. Renée Wicklund of Richman Law & Policy.

The Mondelez cocoa class action lawsuit is Tim Gollogly v. Mondelez International Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-07368, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Tesla racial discrimination class action gets 2025 trial date
• 15K FedEx drivers file class action over OT wages
• Judge gives final approval to $9.39M White Castle BIPA settlement
• NCAA settles NIL class action for $2.78B, allows revenue sharing with athletes